you're absolutely right for me I have learned from the existence of the solution
there're a few months back.
this is clearly revolutionary although apparently already made ​​his year as
aerospace industry (amongst others) uses this method for manufacturing
parts metal / titanium and ceramic .
Its technology will allow a good phenomenal it's very exciting.

For the manufacture hypothetical my delirium I had said that I will continue
imagine its realization by Machine High Tech common as you except the
in course for two parts : the trigger and the rear handle flu
the plastic 3d printing is clearly the ideal solution

PS. Besides the fact that I did not know at the time the printing 3d
Epoxy pat as the advantage of power is modeled in a minute, which is
the first step to creating a flu has adapted his hand.
Course is far from being the only method.

i had high hopes to see something here... until i saw the epoxy pictures above which looks like someone got carried away with playdoh and just caked on whatever was in front of them.

you need to shave that **** off and work on sculpting with it alone if thats going to be the medium you use.

you sir have no appreciation for the creative process this man has been able to accomplish, he went from concept and idea to completion of design translating french to poor English and viceversa. This **** you talk about is not easy. so, ignoring your childish and absurd comments please leave and never come back.

For my part I think the easiest way is cheaper (for those who
have access to a mechanical autococker) is to strip it almost entirely, it
You just keep what I put on the drawing
the biggest challenge is the expansion chamber, I drew a method but
there are many other cheaper solutions is more accessible as good
old bottle buffer
This austerity is intended to allow a long energy transfer to the ball
ensuring that the Culet not move and especially that the valve stays open very
for a long time

rigolo 7788 I have a very important question and if you agree to play the game you have to
convinced by arguments that mathematical scientists are factors that
can influence the curve of the ball to give a path more or
less tense.
you will probably agree with me, that we can forget the effect of backspin
(because friction (balanced) compels the ball to go in the right
tube, thereby nullifying the effects print upstream)

if there are actually two curves I see only one factor that can
generate: the deformation of the ball during flight are but I do not believe it! I
equivalent condition seems logical that there was a type of path and
that whatever technology gun which propels the ball

Step 1. Connect the output of a common air tank to a paintball barrel.
Step 2. Place a nylon ball (same mass as paintball) at the rear of your barrel so that it prevents the air in the tank from escaping.
Step 3. Use a pin or other mechanism to prevent the ball from launching while you fill the tank.
Step 4. Release nylon ball and note pressure/velocity relation.
Step 5. Increase pressure until you reach 310FPS.

The calculations I did are purely theoretical and very approximated because I neglected air resistance (rho (air) * S (ball) * V ² / 2).
I am not an expert in fluids mechanical so I can not give you very reasoned response but for me the parameters that affect the trajectory of the ball are:
- Calibration of the ball and the barrel (influences the guide of the ball and the pressure drop on the back of the ball due to the non sealing)
- Internal form of barrel, whose diameter can vary and the acceleration of the ball undergo significant changes in the barrel
- Mass of the ball
- Stiffness of the shell of the ball (which is why the balls "upscale" are balls hard that stay round despite the efforts they undergo, and therefore all follow the same path)
- And for me one of the most important, the flow of air at the outlet of the barrel (reason why venturi and others bolts exist) that I think is crucial when leaving the barrel

It seems difficult, if not impossible to put all these parameters in equation without thorough study and the study by iteration and physical tests seems to me the most sensible (but can also be the most expensive and longest)